Entertainment Blogs

An online journal about visual art, the urban landscape and design. Mary Louise Schumacher, the Journal Sentinel's art and architecture critic, leads the discussion and a community of writers contribute to the dialogue.

Janet Zweig's public art project in trouble

Well, things did not go well at the meeting of the Public Works Committee of the Common Council this morning. Janet Zweig's public art project, which has been in the works for three years, the most significant and promising project to come along in probably a decade, may not happen. »Read Full Blog Post

While we strive for a lively and vigorous debate of the issues, we do not tolerate name calling, foul language or other inappropriate behavior. Please see our discussion guidelines and terms of use for more information.

While we do our best to moderate comments, we do not screen comments before they are posted. If you see a comment that violates our guidelines, please use the "Report Abuse" link to notify us of the issue.

I accessed the online story about Zweig's story after reading it in the print edition -- I was so excited about it and wanted to share it with some friends. I am dismayed to know that Milwaukee's elected officials turned their backs on this marvelous, witty, engaging work. I certainly hope the voters in Milwaukee object strongly to their limited thinking about public art. I want to come to Milwaukee and see this!

I hesitate to comment on something I know so little about but the small, one viewer at a time nature of this artwork troubles me.

Zweig is quoted saying that she wanted a less obtrusive artwork to avoid the controversy of past proposals. I think public art needs to engage and not hide under wraps (then there's Christo but you get what I mean).

But what is to be done? The Public Art process in Milwaukee seems so dysfunctional!

Just know, that once again, Mike Brenner (seemingly your buddy), interjects irrational, rude, scatological comments into what was otherwise a sane, intelligent, considered debate. Because of this, and the fact you allow (encourage?) it, leaves me wanting to dump (no pun intended) the whole idea of interaction with your blog, and just move on to a more adult (i.e. no Brenner) meaningful conversation elsewhere.

As a city, we constantly ask to be taken seriously--sports, tourism, arts. Yet, when faced with a relatively straight-forward, compelling art project, using heavyweight materials that look like they'd stand the test of time, with only a 20% financial commitment, we turn our backs on the opportunity.

One of the main reasons we opened our own retail location, back in 1986, was that we wanted the opportunity to try new ideas--good, bad, ugly, funny--without a major barrier to the creative process.

It's scary to think that there is an artist waiting for a city committee to judge the artful-ness of her work.

In the long run, this decision is representative of the challenges we have as Milwaukee citizens in the next 20 years. Do we grow and evolve as a city? Or, do we take the safe route, and have all our new art, architecture, and technology be announced, and immediately old.

MRLUNDT - She wasn't showcasing the art, she was showcasing the device. The art inside could have been stick figure drawings because the final art work has yet to be produced. The Common Council was fixated on the art when she was demonstrating the size, appearance and functionality of the device.

There are those who want to move Milwaukee to the present. There are those who want to keep it behind. Donovan and his like have no business being on an arts council. Why are Alderman even on arts councils?

This is public art...and the aldermen work for us. I am hopeful that the art community will rally behind this one. I was so excited to see the project the other day. Hopeful, then immediately fearful that Milwaukee would once again sabotage the work and make what should be an exciting process painful and disappointing. I guess we will find out if the art community does have a voice here.

As to the comments about the work enticing graffitti. Graffitti can happen anywhere. Our beautiful Calatrava was tagged not that long ago. We can't be afraid to build beautiful interesting works because someone may deface it. That gives the miscreant's power by making us fearful to create.

Go to the Common Council web site- read the committee descriptions- seems oddly inappropriate to have the Public Works committee reviewing this, and not the Community and Economic Development Committee.

Seeing the description of the Public Works Committee's responsibilities is it any wonder they'd apply all their collective experience and expertise and treat it like trash?

It's no wonder this went all wrong. Poor presentation- partially the artist's fault. You can't know the limitations of your audience's imagination- so don't test it. The "technology test" just screamed "kill this project". No champion at the presentation- at least that I can tell. You can't make the sale without a salesperson. Ill-informed or confused committee. The money was approved, the art already vetted. Seems they arrogantly wandered into territory that wasn't theirs to step in. Entitlement to expertise is a cruelly ugly thing. Donovan recently made a stink about a court over stepping it's bounds. Funny it seems he has no problem over stepping his own.

The art community here is not exempt. No presence, no organization, lack of information. Lots to learn and it isn't too late.

Really. How can a curious and interesting piece like this struggle, but the god awful cold and anonymous Takashi Soga for Lincoln Park move toward a reality?

E-mail Newsletter

Keep up with the art scene and trends in urban design with art and architecture critic Mary Louise Schumacher. Every week, you'll get the latest reviews, musings on architecture and her picks for what to do on the weekends.